tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post3933394838282895415..comments2024-03-29T06:00:27.896+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Two years on, the Patents County Court is ready for changeVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-48679660519882274022012-09-13T13:42:08.306+01:002012-09-13T13:42:08.306+01:00As it stands, the PCC will handle plant variety ri...As it stands, the PCC will handle plant variety rights provided they are on the UK register maintained by the Plant Variety Rights Office in Cambridge. This is quite useless, as the vast majority of plant breeders are now using Community Plant Variety Rights (and have been since 1995) - simply because the single Community PVR is far cheaper than multiple applications in EU member states. These are held on the register maintained by the Community Plant Variety Office in Angers, France. Apparently, it would require a new SI to add CPVR to the PCC remit - this has been done for Community trademarks and designs, so why not plant varieties?<br />PVRs are the Cinderella of IP rights - we never get invited to the Ball!Graham Spencerhttp://www.plantsforeurope.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-58598904556280011852012-09-13T13:36:18.641+01:002012-09-13T13:36:18.641+01:00@AmeriKat - Passing off will be included (CPR 63.1...@AmeriKat - Passing off will be included (CPR 63.1 but not 63.2). The full statutory instrument can be found here:<br /><br />http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/2208/article/10/madeChris Hoolenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-66166401274502583402012-09-13T13:21:08.215+01:002012-09-13T13:21:08.215+01:00Comment #2 might reveal more about its writer (and...Comment #2 might reveal more about its writer (and his jurisdiction) than it does about litigating in England. <br /><br />I don't have any experience in English patent litigation of this year-long process of "kicking heels" (but I agree that, wherever it happens, it can't be very nice for the kickers or the kicked). If he has suffered repeated bouts of it, well then no wonder Commenter #2 and his heels are sore, and not yet healed. <br /><br />In which jurisdiction is the personal direct experience of Commenter #2, that fuels his heartfelt lament about kicking heels all through the year. Will he tell us? It would be interesting to know.MaxDreinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-75524013580266243442012-09-13T12:33:22.154+01:002012-09-13T12:33:22.154+01:00"In one patent case, the action was heard in ..."In one patent case, the action was heard in the morning and decided in the afternoon and included cross-examination" is that fast if the parties have been kicking their heals outside the court for a year or more? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-838162956983501802012-09-13T10:42:53.675+01:002012-09-13T10:42:53.675+01:00Aside from the extremely important issue of choice...Aside from the extremely important issue of choice of tools to get the facts of the matter revealed, we should (in the context of comparing the English way of patent litigation with the way the continentals do it) also distinguish on the issue how many "goes" does it take to get to a Decision that disposes of the matter and effectively ends the litigation. I mean, an interim decision by well-meaning Uncle Judge is not much use if, after it issues, the squabbling children just keep on going with their litigation. Litigation is for those situations where ADR can't deliver. Lowerr court judges who think they can force the parties to settle are thinking wishfully.<br /><br />Compare, then, two systems. In the first of these, the first Decision is a full one, and appeal from it is usually futile. That first Decision issues within months rather than years.<br /><br />In the second system, a bifurcated one, one track handles issues of infringement (sometimes very quickly) and the other does validity, with everybody appealing each successive instance till there is confluence of infringement and validity for the first time, at the Supreme Court. <br /><br />Perhaps the current Samsung and Apple design patent litigation will provide useful facts for a comparative study. I do hope such a study finally displaces the Improver story, so old that the patent in suit had a priority date from before the date of birth of most readers of this blog. MaxDreinoreply@blogger.com